United States

Here, the plaintiff was a resident of Massachusetts and she sought an abuse prevention order against her nonresident partner.  The plaintiff and her partner met in Massachusetts and moved to Florida, where they had a child.  The plaintiff took the child to Massachusetts on occasion but the defendant never returned.  The plaintiff alleged that the defendant physically abused her and she fled to Massachusetts with her son.  The plaintiff alleged that prior to her escape, the defendant accused her of cheating, called her a whore, and threatened to kill her and the child.&nb

The Court held that a policeman could not be sued under 42 U.S.C. 1983 for failing to enforce a restraining order. Jessica Gonzales was granted a restraining order against her husband during their divorce proceedings. In violation of the restraining order, Gonzales's husband took her three children, and despite repeated efforts by Jessica to have the order enforced, the police took no action. During this time, Gonzales's husband killed the couple's three children.

The plaintiff worked at-will as a sales representative for the defendant. Shortly after she started working there, she discovered she was pregnant and informed her supervisor. Shortly after that, her supervisor informed her that her yearly salary would be halved, allegedly because she had failed to meet sales quotas. When she contacted the CEO (with whom she had interviewed) about her pay reduction, her supervisor met informed her that it was inappropriate to go over his head.

In Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Albany v. Serio, 7 N.Y.3d 510 (2006), a group of religiously affiliated organizations challenged a New York statute that required health insurance plans covering prescription drugs to include contraceptive coverage under the Women’s Health and Wellness Act (NY Insurance Law § 3221(16) and § 4303(cc)).

An man appealed his restraining order, which prevented him from contacting his ex-wife, arguing that the lower court did not properly establish a finding of domestic abuse despite his ex-wife’s testimony that he repeatedly used vulgar and threatening language towards her, at times placing her in fear of physical harm. The Rhode Island Supreme Court upheld the restraining order and underlying finding of domestic abuse, citing the definition of domestic abuse in Title 15, Chapter 15 of the General Laws of Rhode Island: “Among the acts specified in . . .

After pleading guilty, appellant-father was convicted of several counts of sexually abusing his daughter. Appellee-mother filed a petition to terminate father’s parental rights to the daughter, and the District Court terminated his parental rights pursuant to Wyo. Stat. Ann.

Cece, a young Albanian woman fled Albania to avoid trafficking and prostitution rings which target young women living alone. While living alone in Korce, Cece caught the attention of one of the leaders of a well-known prostitution ring. He followed, harassed, and threatened Cece. Her reports of the assault to the authorities were perfunctorily dismissed. Thereafter, Cece fled to the United States (“U.S.”) using a fraudulently procured Italian passport, whereupon she filed for asylum and withholding of removal within the one-year statutory period.

In Cesare v. Cesare, 154 N.J. 394, 713 A.2d 390 (1998), the plaintiff sought a restraining order against her husband under the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act of 1991, N.J. Stat. § 2C:25-17 et seq., following an argument concerning the dissolution of their marriage. During the argument, the defendant threatened that the plaintiff would never gain custody of their children and that he would never sell the family home or share its proceeds.

In the case Chambers v. Trettco, Inc., 463 Mich. 297, 614 N.W.2d 910 (2000), a former employee filed suit against her employer under the Michigan Civil Rights Act, Mich. Comp.

In the case Chicoine v. Chicoine, 479 N.W.2d 891 (S.D. 1992), the parties were married for three years before the wife engaged in a series of openly same-sex affairs. The husband obtained a temporary custody order for their two children and later filed for divorce on the grounds of extreme cruelty. The trial court awarded custody to the husband, granted the wife restricted visitation including unsupervised overnight visits, and imposed an additional condition prohibiting unrelated women or gay men from being present during the visitation.